Article from November 21, 2024, “bumped” on the occasion of its translation into Japanese and English.
For once, Bob has decided to cover a topic that’s (somewhat) serious. Because even though video games remain, in my eyes, a leisure activity above all, we shouldn’t forget that gaming is now an industry of considerable economic and cultural significance. With revenues nearing 200 billion dollars, providing direct employment to 330,000 people and growing steadily, it’s now enjoyed by roughly 1.5 billion gamers—mostly on smartphones, unfortunately (sob!).
For a long time, video game production was perceived primarily as a duel between the United States and Japan. But now, game development has become truly globalized, marked by Europe’s emergence and especially China’s significant presence, headed by the giant Tencent. Such a powerful industry, impacting such a massive audience (almost a quarter of the world’s population!), was inevitably bound to become politically charged at some point. This phenomenon had been simmering for a few years; in 2024, it’s now firmly a reality. How does this affect the peaceful life of a gaming enthusiast like Bob? Practically speaking, not a whole lot.
Admittedly, the word “political” is very broad; by selecting this term, I simply emphasize that games today have significantly lost much of their neutrality. No longer content to be just pure entertainment without deeper subtext, video games now often display—alongside, or sometimes instead of their playful intent—the societal beliefs and convictions of their creators. Here, I’m not referring specifically to those games intended solely as tools for political messages (such as the PETA activists’ bizarre “Mario Kills Tanooki,” or propaganda games around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict), nor about the censorship imposed externally (like the long-standing restrictions in Germany around Nazism) or preventively applied by developers (such as when Konami removed crosses from Western versions of “Castlevania”). I’m referencing instead those games for which choices in game design (deliberately avoiding the term “artistic”) reveal a political orientation. Inevitably, these decisions provoke reactions—positive or negative… among informed observers, that is! Because the move towards this politicization is, in reality, occurring unbeknownst to most gamers who don’t follow industry behind-the-scenes. Still, a neutral and somewhat sharp observer can easily point out two main sources of conflict: first, tensions in the Western world around “wokism,” and second, a cultural rift between Western Europe/North America and the rest of the globe. And naturally, these issues are handled with all the restraint and intelligence we’ve come to expect from the gaming community!
Incels vs Wokes: The Clash of the Pathetic
In the video game microcosm, one player has repeatedly made headlines—both positively and negatively: Sweet Baby Inc. To put it simply, the company’s primary business is consulting for game studios, offering improvements on a game’s content during development, particularly in narrative and game design. So far, nothing too unusual, as this kind of B2B service (meaning business support for professionals) is commonplace in the industry in general. The controversy probably stems from the background of its co-founder, Kim Belair, formerly from Ubisoft (already off to a rocky start!), who left the Guillemot brothers’ company declaring she saw no future for herself in the gaming industry as a woman of mixed heritage. From there on, influenced by the intelligence that characterizes our modern societies—built on instant information and immediate reaction, bypassing the brain entirely—anything and everything became possible!
Indeed, the gaming industry, alongside certain segments of players, has proven it can slip up significantly on several occasions: sexist harassment exemplified by Gamergate, crunch culture, mass and opportunistic layoffs, in-game hate speech, and cyber-bullying within e-sports—the unfortunate examples abound. Therefore, seeking improvement behind the scenes of this dream-making factory isn’t inherently problematic. But influencing the artistic direction (broadly defined) of games, as Sweet Baby Inc proposes, is another matter entirely. This amounts to remodeling video game “thinking” itself to align it with currently trendy progressive ideas. Now, if that’s the developer’s own preference—fine. However, every action inevitably sparks a reaction. If developers are perfectly within their rights to imbue their games with the political “flavor” they desire, and Sweet Baby Inc is entirely justified in affirming its principles, then it equally follows that they should accept when some express differing opinions—and respect those opinions. Unfortunately, that hasn’t been the case here.
This drama sparked a response: a Steam curator group named “Sweet Baby Inc Detected,” which lists every game Sweet Baby Inc has worked on—and more broadly, games in which the curator thinks it has detected elements of DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion)—with an explicit recommendation against them. As of this writing, the group has accumulated almost 460,000 followers—all of whom reject, for various personal reasons, the progressive perspectives defended by Sweet Baby Inc. One side makes a proposal, and the other side counters it; everybody should just enjoy what they prefer, end of the story. Yet unfortunately, we are living in an era in which political thought apparently can only be built through destructive opposition: “for me to be right, the other must inevitably be wrong,” with the immediate conclusion being, “for me to exist, the other must disappear.”
Honestly, I’m not sure who fired first in this affair, but the result is clear: you have to pick a camp. On one side, you have the newly righteous friends of Sweet Baby Inc, starting with video game and tech journalists, who usually have a left-leaning bias: Numérama, for example, describes Sweet Baby Inc as “a small Canadian company”—although this business has 46 employees and probably invoices clients in the millions (see below). But the bias is openly assumed: the anonymous heroes of moral virtue consider it their noble duty to defend the innocent company harassed by evil “neckbeards.” Nearly every professional media article has a one-sided commentary on this phenomenon, including my beloved Canard PC—whose brief news by Perco on March 12, 2024, does the profession of journalism little honor! And what about Sweet Baby Inc themselves? Besides the usual victim card played, the company’s cause isn’t helped at all by comments from Kim Belair, who notably described straight white male gamers as “whiny babies” (around the 20-minute mark in the video): racism, sexism, disdainful insults, ridiculous generalizations—all of this surely positions her as a strong contender for the championship of the pathetic!
But for this farce to be truly complete, the opposition also needs to be suitably ridiculous. While I continue to defend gamers’ right to reject the progressive political direction pursued by parts of the game industry, I must admit that the arguments offered against Sweet Baby Inc and its clientele are fairly flimsy. Take Kabrutus, for example, the Brazilian gamer behind the Steam curation group Sweet Baby Inc Detected. By both his appearance and his rhetoric, he encapsulates the absurd caricature of a “neckbeard” (the overweight, bearded know-it-all who lives in his parents’ basement), and eagerly employs masculinist imagery—starting with the logo of the website DEIDetected.com, created on the heels of the group’s success: a buffed-up warrior exuding nationalist overtones (though the original logo has recently been slightly altered—perhaps the fellow managed to hire a professional PR consultant!).
At the center of this controversy—bearing a striking resemblance to a Gamergate 2.0 event in some aspects—Kabrutus is followed by an anonymous horde freshly emerged from the internet sewers of 4chan, Reddit, and 9gag, whose arguments are hardly more nuanced than those proposed by their opposition: “Sweet Baby Inc seeks to destroy gaming culture,” “Sweet Baby Inc is behind every industry failure this year,” and—let’s not forget—”Sweet Baby Inc is undermining the very foundations of Western civilization itself!”
Ultimately, this is what it’s all about, and it’s precisely here that good old Bob—still sticking to his topic—can confidently claim video games have become political: Sweet Baby Inc is not the innocent little lamb portrayed by the press. This politicization of games is the heart of the issue. It mirrors a broader pixel-flavored power struggle between creators and users, echoing a “digital” version of the division between elites and ordinary people. Indeed, even the future US Minister of Governmental Efficiency himself—Mr. Elon Musk—felt it was worth weighing in, declaring that video games have turned “woke.”
Reductio ad Hitlerum
At this point, the term “woke”—which appears to have become the Godwin point of the right-wing folks—is out in the open. And once “wokism” has entered the chat, two things immediately become clear: (1) the debate has hit a dead-end, and (2) it will polarize intensely. Put bluntly, now that we’ve reached an impasse, this conflict will probably end badly for all involved, devolving into a metaphorical knife fight. But honestly, it’s not surprising: on my left, the victimization narrative promoted by Sweet Baby Inc and the progressive camp that supports them; on my right, the conspiratorial ravings of the anti-DEI brigade. We’re now firmly locked into an age-old rivalry between wokes and incels, two groups united only by the distortion in the foundations of their respective thought systems.
There is no hope of reconciliation between these factions. Frankly I’m uninterested in two pathetic groups clashing uselessly in a back alley—which would be completely irrelevant if it didn’t carry along reciprocal threats, including death threats. However, what’s truly interesting here is something revealed by this tedious rearguard battle: a fracture—illustrated here in the video game industry but extending far beyond—between Western Europe/North America on one side (which I will christen with the delightful neologism “Western Occident,” soon coming to Merriam-Webster) and the rest of the globe on the other. Once taken out of our Western bubble, the situation becomes substantially clearer: that remaining world outside our self-contained space represents 7.5 billion people out of a global population that barely exceeds 8 billion. And yes, seeing those statistics might sting a bit!
It’s surely no accident that Kabrutus of the aforementioned Sweet Baby Inc Detected fame hails from Brazil. For the bulk of humanity, ideological struggles around what we broadly label as “wokism” are insignificant, distant, and luxury problems limited to richer countries. In the specific case of Sweet Baby Inc, a particular recent event sharply illuminated this reality— the release of “Black Myth: Wukong,” arguably the first fully Chinese AAA game in history. And regardless of the quality and critical praise this game has garnered, its very existence is notably significant—not just for video games, but also from a broader, global perspective.
Here comes a new challenger !
Additionally, the development and release of a culturally ambitious work for the Western market signals a broader shift in China’s soft power strategy. In simple terms, the Chinese government is now attempting to export its cultural vision abroad—thereby extending its influence and power—by leveraging and embracing a new medium: video games. While previously cautious about this entertainment industry, Beijing has evidently recognized that just as Western games influenced generations at home, Chinese-designed games are now uniquely positioned to culturally sway the West. But you don’t catch flies with vinegar; the game itself must first possess real quality. This, given the review scores and sales figures, appears to be very much the case here.
The rest of the story follows the classic playbook of communist dictatorships: exerting pressure on journalists and influencers so they avoid topics sensitive to Xi Jinping—feminism, Chinese politics, Covid-19, etc. (and some might even cheekily throw “Winnie the Pooh” into that censorship mix!). Journalists and content creators were strongly encouraged to refrain from touching these taboo topics or experiencing unpleasant consequences—a common practice of authoritarian regimes. Unsurprisingly, professional video game media obediently complied, conveniently overlooking the confirmed sexist culture at Game Science studio—a transgression which, had it occurred over here, would have immediately led to social cancellation.
And even Sweet Baby Inc—whether innocent little studio or evil deconstructionist devil, depending on your politics—couldn’t help inserting themselves into this mess, albeit unsuccessfully. According to a report circulating on the Chinese social media site Weibo, Sweet Baby Inc reportedly offered Game Science studio their “professional expertise” at the colossal price of 7 million dollars. Of course, this “scoop” stems from Weibo, a social network under the tight leash and supervision of the Chinese government, making its reliability highly questionable. Nevertheless, as always, it was quickly relayed across the internet, twisted, amplified, and exaggerated. If this enormous price estimate was genuine, it thoroughly discredits the myth of Sweet Baby Inc as an innocent small Canadian venture. Conspiracy enthusiasts seized the opportunity to portray Sweet Baby Inc as a ruthless protection-racket operation extorting companies by monetizing progressive righteousness. If one thing appears crystal clear, it’s that outside our comfortable ideological bubble exists another world—7.5 billion inhabitants on a planet of barely more than 8 billion—that also (or perhaps still?) wants room to assert itself.
Conclusion ?
Old Bob is talkative today. But the topic is actually quite complex because, beyond the usual pointless bickering that the global network has unfortunately made us accustomed to, real issues are at stake. And Bob warned you—video games have become political. In our little bubble of Western Europe and North America, the gaming industry has largely chosen to embrace the progressive ideas currently in vogue—and in that sense, Sweet Baby Inc is just joining the party—possibly alienating a portion of players who don’t identify with these ideas.
But if we make the effort to step outside our bubble, it becomes clear that “Western Occident” progressivism isn’t exactly in vogue. From Brazil, we see a backlash against DEI, while Poland’s Madmind Studio unashamedly offers players the chance to embody a prostitute—who must satisfy her clients while avoiding being murdered by a psychopath—or a sadistic serial killer. In Japan, Square Enix has distanced itself from Sweet Baby Inc and, more broadly, from progressive mandates—likely after learning the hard way the lesson of “Go Woke, Go Broke.” Meanwhile, the Korean game Stellar Blade is a massive success, despite being accused of sexism in our part of the world—sexism supposedly stemming from the depiction of a female body deemed unrealistic… even though it’s based on a real woman!
In reality, while the gaming industry in “Western Occident” regions seems to be in crisis—with major failures and massive layoffs—the global gaming industry is thriving, especially in Asia and even worldwide, including in “Western Occident” markets. The sector’s struggles are likely due to strategic mistakes rather than its political leanings. Most of the games that failed—whether due to the involvement of Sweet Baby Inc or anti-DEI groups, depending on your political stance—were simply bad games. The fact is, the silent majority of players, now fully globalized and voting with their wallets, is neither woke nor incel, but simply passionate about games. A good game will succeed, a bad one won’t—regardless of whether it features a racialized transgender character or an Asian pin-up in a thong. And Bob just wants to play in peace, without being told what to think or not think. Seriously!
